It is not the place here to discuss the meaning of your quote from Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra because the context is the thirty-seven auxiliaries according to abhidhamma. To imply that this would represent Nagarjuna's teaching on "supramundane right view" is not appropriate. But really, I think we should not embark on a discussion of prajñāpāramitā here because that's a sphere completely incompatible with Theravada view and going by mere words is very deceptive.Dhammanando wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 4:38 pmNot just in the Theravāda. All Indian Buddhist schools whose texts survive (including the Mahāyāna ones) treated right view as a mode of paññā/prajñā. This isn't surprising given that the suttas themselves class the first two factors of the eightfold path as the "training in wisdom."
Vasubandhu on mundane right view:
Nāgārjuna on supramundane right view:laukikī punaḥ samyag-dṛṣṭir-manovijñāna-samprayuktā kuśala-sāsravā prajñā.
Mundane right view is prajñā associated with a mind-consciousness that is wholesome, but accompanied by the inflows.
(Auto-commentary to the Abhidharmakośa ch. I. 41ab.)
Wisdom (prajñā) constitutes: a. the four foundations of mindfulness (smṛtyupasthāna); b. the faculty of wisdom (prajñendriya); c. the power of wisdom (prajñābala); d. the factor-of-enlightenment called discernment of dharmas (dharmapravicayasaṃbodhyaṅga); e. the path factor called right view (samyagdṛṣṭi).
(Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra vol III. p. 945
But generally spoken: it would certainly be difficult to say that 'right view', mundane or supramundane, would be opposed to paññā. Why? Because if right view is caused by right insight, how could it be opposed to paññā? How could it be said to be different from paññā?
But consider a learner who learns 'right view' through listening and reading. It certainly can't be said that such a learned 'right view' is necessarily based on right insight. Thus such a learned 'right view' isn't necessarily paññā.
And saying "I have learned from Ven. Dhammanando that 'right view' is considered to belong to the faculty of paññā in Theravada" just means that according to you 'right view' seems to always belong to paññā in Theravada, even when a heard 'right view' is just repeated like a poem learned by heart.
That is why above I've added:
When someone utters a verbal 'right view' it is impossible for me to see whether it's the faculty of paññā. That's why dissent arose in the context of 'seeing impermanence' and that being called 'right view' in a sutta. I would have preferred to call it 'right insight'. But I have learned that the Theravada does not differentiate in this way. So that's how it is.